ICCT Coachnotes
Dealing with Learner Errors
© Cheri Pierson (2005) Institute for Cross-Cultural Training
W heaton College, W heaton, IL 60187-5593 http://www.wheaton.edu/bgc/icct/
Everyone makes mistakes when speaking. Even native speakers make mistakes in their own language. As a language teacher or tutor—and even as a language learner—it is important to know how to treat errors in oral communication. However, the issue of dealing with oral errors in adult second language learning is complex, with specialists in the field holding varying opinions. Let’s look at four basic questions most commonly asked about the correction of oral errors: Should errors be corrected? That is, does error correction serve a useful purpose? If yes, what types of errors should be corrected? When should they be corrected? How should they be corrected? By grappling with answers to these questions, those who work with adult second language learners will be better prepared to make more effective decisions about the treatment of errors that learners make in the classroom and when communicating in the broader community beyond the classroom.
Should Learner Errors Be Corrected? Historically, language specialists have held varying opinions about error correction. In the 1950s and 1960s all errors in oral production were considered bad and always in need of correction (Brooks, 1964). During the 1970s and early 1980s the pendulum swung to a more relaxed approach with some specialists recommending no direct error correction at all (Krashen & Terrell, 1983). In recent years language learning specialists have taken a more balanced view when answering the question, “Should errors be corrected?” Most no longer insist on correcting every error, but neither do they avoid correction altogether. Instead, today’s practitioners believe that a sensitive approach to the development of increased accuracy can improve the learner’s proficiency in the language. This also meets the felt need of most adult language learners, who want and expect some correction from their language instructors and other native speakers (Cathcart & Olsen, 1976).
What Types of Errors Should Be Corrected? To follow the advice of current specialists in the field means that we will not attempt to correct every error we hear in oral communication. But this leads to another question: Which errors should we attempt to correct and which ones should be left alone? Let’s look at three categories of errors that may need some form of correction: (1) errors that impair communication, (2) errors that have a stigmatizing effect, and (3) errors that are produced the most frequently. Each of these three can cause considerable difficulty for the learner. Errors that Impair Communication Burt and Kiparsky (1972) categorize errors as global or local. Global errors break down communication and prevent the listener from comprehending the intended meaning of the speaker. Local errors, on the other hand, involve a minor violation in the language without affecting the intended meaning. Hendrickson (1980) recommends that local errors should not be corrected, while global errors, including global errors of form (e.g., grammar, pronunciation or vocabulary), need to be treated in some way since they impair communication. For example, while I was living in Gothenburg, I found a language helper who worked with me in Swedish in exchange for some conversation lessons in English. One day while we were practicing English, we had the following exchange:
-1-
ICCT Coachnotes
Kia: Cheri: Kia: Cheri:
Dealing with Learner Errors
How long you here for, Cheri? I’m here for about a year to study Swedish. You already here for one year? No…I’ve only been here several months.
Later as I analyzed this conversation, I realized that the miscommunication related to Kia’s first question, “How long (are) you here for?” which usually refers to the future. What Kia really wanted to ask was “How long have you been here?” She chose the wrong English verb form, which led to misunderstanding (a global error). When I met with her the next time, we reviewed the conversation so that in future encounters with English speakers she might ask the appropriate question in order to get the response she wanted. Errors that Stigmatize the Learner Global errors of meaning include those that stigmatize the learner, for example, as rude, indifferent or stupid. These errors often occur when the language learner fails to understand or respond appropriately to the social rules of the target culture. For example, one of my international students reported the following conversation to me: Radu (enters a food mart): Proprietor (not responding): Radu: Proprietor (weighs six apples): Radu: Proprietor:
Good morning. It’s beautiful day? What can I do for you? Give me six apples. Anything else? No. How much this? $1.23
From the conversation it doesn’t appear that there are any global errors of form that would cause miscommunication. However, Radu felt that the proprietor was “cold and indifferent” because he ignored Radu’s greeting. When I told him that the proprietor may have been distracted by a large number of customers, Radu was still upset because in his culture you always respond to a greeting before you do business. As we discussed the scenario, Radu began to understand the situation from a different cultural perspective. First, he came to realize that in this English-speaking food mart it is important that the proprietor waits on customers quickly and efficiently. Second, he remembered that the customer is expected to use polite language (e.g., please) to make a request. (Although Radu knew this social rule, he forgot to use please because he was upset with the proprietor’s indifference.) In summary, as far as the two very different cultures were concerned, both Radu and the proprietor seemed to be responding appropriately, but when the conversation was viewed by the other participant’s perspective some serious social rules had been broken on both sides. This follow-up discussion helped Radu identify his own errors in the exchange. As a result, when he returned to the food mart several days later, he had a linguistically successful exchange with the proprietor. I have discovered that people in the target culture usually don’t mind if foreigners make some grammatical mistakes (e.g., “How much this?”). However, they are not as forgiving of those who violate the social rules of the culture such as making a request in a way that sounds rude or otherwise inappropriate. Thus, this latter type of error is clearly a candidate for correction. Errors that Are Produced Frequently Errors that are produced frequently may also need to be addressed. Brown (2000) offers the example: “John cans sing. John mays sing. John wills go” (p. 218). Here, we understand the communication, but the speaker seems to be having difficulty distinguishing modals (e.g., may, can) from other verb forms. Sometimes the language learner may benefit from explicit instruction in a case where specific grammar rules are broken. In this case, explicit instruction may help to reduce the frequency of errors with modals. -2-
ICCT Coachnotes
Dealing with Learner Errors
To summarize, when teachers, tutors and others ask the question, “What types of errors should be corrected?” I suggest they first consider the significance of the error. Will it impair communication? Does it cause the speaker to be stigmatized in a negative way? Does it occur frequently? Answering these questions is the first step toward dealing effectively with learners’ oral errors.
When Should Errors Be Corrected? Once we have identified an error as a candidate for correction, we need to determine the best time to give correction so that the feedback will “stick” and be genuinely helpful to the learner. Cohen (1990) offers various criteria that can help teachers and tutors to decide when to correct oral errors and when to postpone correction to a more opportune time or occasion. He suggests that oral corrections will most likely have an impact when: 1. The learner is developmentally ready for the correction being offered and has adequate knowledge about the structures involved. 2. The learner has time to digest the corrections. 3. The learner writes down the correction form in a notebook—possibly in a special section for that kind of information. 4. The learner verifies the correct form with a native speaker (e.g., the teacher, tutor, helper or someone else) at a later time. (adapted from Cohen, 1990, p. 60) When talking with language learners, as well as with teacher and tutors, I believe it is important to help them understand that every error they deem “serious” does not have to be corrected immediately. In fact, it is usually counterproductive to attempt immediate correction of all errors, especially when learners are at the stage where they make numerous errors in speaking. Rather, an understanding of when correction will be most effective and when it should be postponed can help learners feel more accepting of their inevitable errors that are a part of the language learning process and help them develop more realistic expectations. Also, a clearer understanding of when to correct can help teachers and tutors relax a bit and not feel that they are either neglecting their duty when correction is appropriately postponed or that the learner will be permanently harmed when there is no attempt to correct every error immediately.
How Should Errors Be Corrected? Once we have decided that correction is warranted, then we must focus on how to correct in a way that is both appropriate and effective. For the teacher or tutor who wishes to treat an error, I suggest the following three-stage model. First, see if the learner initiates a self-correction. To do this, wait a few seconds to see if he or she makes the needed repair. While an average “wait-time” in teacher-learner interaction is about 1-2 seconds, if the learner is given a little longer, say 3-5 seconds, he or she may be able to rethink what was said and initiate a self-repair. Sometimes a cue (e.g., a voice signal or gesture) can signal that an error has occurred, thus giving the learner an opportunity to repair it. Second, for those working in a classroom or small group, if self-correction fails, then ask the learner’s peers for assistance—as long as this is a culturally appropriate practice. This approach will help the others in the group to be engaged in what is happening in the interaction. It also helps the teacher or tutor to know if others are aware of the language problem. Once the peer correction is given, it is important to refer the correction back to the learner in a non-threatening way to check for comprehension. If the student repeats the correction and also shows understanding, be sure to give praise or recognition as appropriate. However, if the learner is not processing the correction, then do not prolong the situation, but note it for additional practice or for focus at a later time when the learner has progressed in overall language proficiency and is developmentally ready to deal with the aspect of the language that has caused the problem. -3-
ICCT Coachnotes
Dealing with Learner Errors
Finally, if steps 1 and 2 fail, the teacher or tutor should assist the learner with the correction. This may include deciding if, in addition to the individual, the whole group needs further work on the problem areas. By following this process and determining the types of errors to treat, we can make more well-informed decisions with errors that impair communication, stigmatize the learner or are repeated often.
Conclusion Error correction is a complex issue with no simple answers. Fortunately, language teaching specialists have provided some useful guidance for those who must grapple with decisions about whether correction is needed for a given error or category of errors—and if it is, what types of errors to correct, when to correct, and how to correct. Once informed about the range of options, those who work with adult second language learners—teachers and tutors—can adapt the suggestions from this article to the needs of their learners. Furthermore, by educating the learners themselves about the issues surrounding error correction, learners can deal more effectively with their own errors and thus make better overall progress in developing second language proficiency. _____________ Cheri Pierson (Ed.D., Northern Illinois University) is an assistant professor of Intercultural Studies/TESOL at Wheaton College Graduate School where she also teaches summer courses for the Institute for CrossCultural Training. She taught English for special purposes in Europe for over ten years and she is an active member of TESOL.
References Brooks, N. (1964). Language and language learning: Theory and practice (2nd edition). New York: W esley Longm an. Brown, H.D. (2000). Principles of language learning and teaching (4th edition).W hite Heath, NY: Addison W esley Longm an. Burt, M .K. and Kiparsky, C. (1972). The gooficon: A repair manual for English. Rowley, MA: Newbury House. Cathcart, R.L. and Olsen, J. (1976). T eachers’ and students’ preferences for correction of classroom conversation errors. In On TESOL 76. J.F. Faneslow and R.H. Crym es. (Eds.). W ashington, DC: Teachers of English to Speakers of Other Languages. Cohen, A.D. (1990). Language learning: Insights for learners, teachers and researchers. New York: Newbury House. Hendrickson, J.M. (1980). Error correction in foreign language teaching: Recent theory, research and practice. In Readings on English as a second language (2nd ed.), K Croft (Ed.). Cam bridge, MA: W inthrop Publishers. Krashen, S. & Terrell, T.D. (1983). The natural approach to language acquisition in the classroom. Oxford: Pergam on Press. Pierson, Cheri. L. (2001). Correction of Oral Errors in Adult Second Language Learning. In Helping Learners Develop Second Language Proficiency, L.J. Dickerson (Ed.). Colorado Springs: MTI.
For m ore ICCT Coachnotes and inform ation on Language Coach W orkshops, go to our ICCT W eb site: http://www.wheaton.edu/bgc/icct/
-4-
